New Delhi: In a case that concerns the importance of equal access to digital services for persons with disabilities (PwDs) and highlights the need for businesses and service providers to prioritise inclusivity, the Delhi High Court expressed shock at Rapido after it was informed about the 170 errors in its audit report.
A bench of Justice Sachin Datta Wednesday was hearing a plea against Rapido, a mobile application that provides bike taxis and logistic services in India, that argued that there were several operational flaws and errors, rendering the app unusable for those with disabilities.
Speaking to ThePrint, advocate Rahul Bajaj, who appeared for the petitioners in this case, said, “On Wednesday, Rapido had presented the summary of an accessibility audit report which showed there were 170 accessibility errors in the platform at the base level.”
“It also showed 81 major failures in the app’s accessibility. In response, we sought that a penalty be imposed on Rapido along with a direction for them to fix these issues in a timely manner.”
Taking note of this, the court told Rapido in “very stern” terms that either they should stop operating in the Indian market altogether or fix these flaws, as operating in a manner that contravenes provisions of The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, was not permissible. Ultimately, Rapido asked for six months to solve the issues, but the court gave it only four months to do so, failing which suitable action could be taken against them.
The court also took note of the fact that the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, had not filed its response despite being given two opportunities to do so.
Consequently, the court directed the ministry’s joint secretary to mark his presence on the next date of hearing and file a response with details of steps taken by them to ensure transport apps are checked for accessibility at the time of release.
The plea against Rapido was filed by a corporate lawyer, legal policymaker, and disability rights activist Amar Jain, who is visually impaired.
He is also the co-founder of NGO Mission Accessibility, along with Siliguri-based banker, Dipto Ghosh Choudhary, who is also visually impaired.
Also Read: Johnson & Johnson granted Rs 3.34 crore in damages by HC, what was the counterfeit products case
The case against Rapido
The heart of the case lies in the daily commuting needs of the petitioners, who rely on the Rapido app, the plea said, while raising serious concerns over the application failure to cater to the accessibility needs of disabled individuals.
Pointing to “operational flaws” within the app that undermine its accessibility features, rendering it significantly unusable for PwDs, the plea flagged that the option to cancel a ride was inaccesible for disabled individuals on the iOS platform—Apple’s mobile operating system.
It also adds that there were several “unlabelled buttons”, including the names of vendors through which payments are to be made for a ride. The option to message drivers was also inaccessible to PwDs as of 5 November 2023, when the plea was filed.
The plea drew attention to the fact that there was no way for the petitioners to communicate their additional needs as persons with disabilities on the app while booking a ride. Such needs could range from requesting a little extra waiting time or help with finding the location, among other things.
Incorporated in 2015, Roppen Transportation Services is the parent company of Rapido, which operates in over 100 cities. However, it still does not have a system in place to accommodate wheelchairs in the cabs or programmes to sensitise its drivers about the needs of PwDs, the plea said.
Choudhary, who is also one of the petitioners in the case, also said that he was once denied a ride when the driver learnt of his disability, thereby undermining his dignity and making him feel like a second-class citizen.
The right to accessibility
The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act marked a watershed moment in the recognition of disability rights in India.
It stipulates, among others, the right to accessibility, which was at play in the present case. According to the 2016 Act, all service providers, both public and private, are legally obliged to ensure that their digital platforms are fully accessible to individuals with disabilities.
The case sheds light on the violation of Sections 40 and 46 of the 2016 Act, which deal with the aspects of accessibility and the time limit for accessibility by service providers, respectively.
Section 40 mandates that the Centre, in consultation with the chief Commissioner, formulate rules for persons with disabilities, laying down the standards of accessibility for the physical environment, transportation, information and communications, including appropriate technologies, systems, and other facilities and services provided to the public in urban and rural areas.
On the other hand, Section 46 says that service providers, whether government or private, shall provide services in accordance with accessibility rules formulated by the Centre under Section 40 within a period of two years from the date of notification of such rules. However, this deadline can be extended by the Centre or the chief commissioner.
The plea added that this issue of inaccessibility also highlights the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways’ failure to put in place a mandate that ensures cab aggregators are functional and accessible for PwDs.
Saying that this is a violation of Section 41(1)(b) of the 2016 Act, which deals with access to transport, the plea argued that the provision states that the government shall take suitable measures to provide access to all modes of transport that conform to the design standards, including retrofitting old modes of transport, wherever technically feasible, safe and economically viable for PwDs.
Given this, the petitioners were seeking an order from the court directing Rapido to conduct an immediate accessibility audit, resolve accessibility barriers expeditiously and ensure comprehensive end-to-end accessibility. They also sought direction to the Ministry of Transport, to put in place a strong legal mandate, and operational guidance for cab aggregators to ensure their offerings are disabled-friendly.
(Edited by Sanya Mathur)
Also Read: What Madhya Pradesh HC said while urging govt to look into ‘harassment’ of lower-rank employees
What about the surge pricing of other apps/aggregators? And
They are equally culpable of the same issue for PwDs too.